donovan to duke

[MSSportsGuy]

Goenstankors has been somewhat over rated. Much of her success at Duke had to do with being in the right spot at the right time. The competition is much tougher now. The level of womens coaching is now much better than it ever was and recruitment for top talent has become more competitive. She was like a one hit wonder who succeeded at Duke during an opportune time. I doubt she would have come close to her results at Duke with another program had she been hired after she bombed out at Texas. Time will tell about Lawson, however the Goenstankors era should not be used as a standard for her in todays WCBB reality. It is much harder to maintian a consistant level of excellence due to the level of competition.

I am going to disagree that Gail was overrated. When the worst finish for a program over 10 years is the S16 that included 2 runners up and 2 other FF appearances, that's saying something about what she had built there.

Is competition tougher now? Gail had Pat to go against before her decline and retirement (and won some of those matchups). Hatchell had some great teams at NC. Tara and Geno were around but not Dawn and Kim was just getting started rolling at Baylor. No Waltz or Vic, and McGraw hadn't reestablished ND as a power after the 01 title. There may have been a little less competition on the coaching forefront.

I think there is more competition for top players now than when Gail was at Duke but not sure there are that many more highly competitive programs. Again, I like Lawson and think she can be successful but we don't know yet if she will get to that level. If she does, I will gladly admit I was wrong.

 

[TCC Kid]

Correct 1 1/4 year. That better darn young.

As another poster has stated: I wouldn't bet against Lawson. True, she hasn't proven she can coach or at least at the Div 1 level.
She knows this game, as a player (not always does this work out), she was the most astute, knowledgeable Color/expert commentator I've listened to on TV.
After Kara Ran around the Civic Center with her index finger in the air I swore at her and that I'd never like her. I was wrong in both cases.
I give her thousands of points for caring for her mentor as her mentor was no longer the person she had been. For that kind of compassion, love, caring, payback--she has earned my caring and respect.
Did I mention, I like Ms Lawson.

 

[willtalk]

I am going to disagree that Gail was overrated. When the worst finish for a program over 10 years is the S16 that included 2 runners up and 2 other FF appearances, that's saying something about what she had built there.

Is competition tougher now? Gail had Pat to go against before her decline and retirement (and won some of those matchups). Hatchell had some great teams at NC. Tara and Geno were around but not Dawn and Kim was just getting started rolling at Baylor. No Waltz or Vic, and McGraw hadn't reestablished ND as a power after the 01 title. There may have been a little less competition on the coaching forefront.

I think there is more competition for top players now than when Gail was at Duke but not sure there are that many more highly competitive programs. Again, I like Lawson and think she can be successful but we don't know yet if she will get to that level. If she does, I will gladly admit I was wrong.

I would also say that Pat was also over rated due to the lack of quality coaching in the womans game. They would be considered average in todays coaching field. C. V. Stringer is an example of the the type of coaches that were able to be very successful during that era based purely on recruitment talent. She just had a lot of talent, threw the basketball at them and said go to it. The level of coaching was very substandard then.

It was an era when most womens basketball coaches were just high profile ex players. Being an ex player does not necessarily translate to being an elite coach. It was not until Title Nine put more emphasis on the womans game and enough time passed allowing it to impact salaries that drew better coaches to WCBB. In the mens game the better coaches were generally not star players in college. Greg Popovich is the perfect example.

The qualities of coaches are often linked to the tree the are the product of. There was not much of a tree in WCBB or the womans game in general. The womans game has undergone a drastic change, not only it its style but the level and skill set of its players. Most of the womans coaches do not have the experience to adjust to take full advantage of those changees. Coaching is a filtering down system that has yet to manifest much in the womans game.

Just the type of players in the High School and AAU feeder system has had a huge impact on the womens college and professional games. Even the most knowledgable college fans on this site are not that aware of what has happened to the feeder systems both in respect to players and coaches. The level of talant and already developed players has expanded to the point where their availability is not exclusive to just a few high profile programs. The same is true of coaches. There are some very good male coaches that decide to coach in the womand game, which is something that didn't happen just a decade and a half ago. Geno was an exception and we see the impact it had. The coaches at that time were purely the product of the womans game they experienced as players which was not reflective of the rapidly changing dynamic of womans basketball.

The ignorance displayed in Mo'ni Davis basketball level displayed by many on this site and in the basketball world, including her own coaches and advisors speak to that. With the basketball track she was on, she had a snow balls chance in hell of even getting a D1 scholarship let along being recruited by a top program. There were just too many players who spent the year round developing skills already way ahead of her. Being a good athlete is just not enough anymore. Her own parants and coaches were totally clueless in that respect.

I believe that the time Becky Hammond spent under Gregg Popovich will reap enormous rewards in years to come in respect to establishing a major Womans Basketball Tree and its resujlting branches. One can already see that Hammond is in league of her own in the WNBA in respect to coaching. She will impact Chelsea Gray, who has the potential to take womanss basketball coaching to another level as well. People on this site will not like this, but time has already passed Geno by. He was the best for his time, but the game has moved on.

 

[CocoHusky]

I would also say that Pat was also over rated due to the lack of quality coaching in the womans game. They would be considered average in todays coaching field. C. V. Stringer is an example of the the type of coaches that were able to be very successful during that era based purely on recruitment talent. She just had a lot of talent, threw the basketball at them and said go to it. The level of coaching was very substandard then.

It was an era when most womens basketball coaches were just high profile ex players. Being an ex player does not necessarily translate to being an elite coach. It was not until Title Nine put more emphasis on the womans game and enough time passed allowing it to impact salaries that drew better coaches to WCBB. In the mens game the better coaches were generally not star players in college. Greg Popovich is the perfect example.

The qualities of coaches are often linked to the tree the are the product of. There was not much of a tree in WCBB or the womans game in general. The womans game has undergone a drastic change, not only it its style but the level and skill set of its players. Most of the womans coaches do not have the experience to adjust to take full advantage of those changees. Coaching is a filtering down system that has yet to manifest much in the womans game.

Just the type of players in the High School and AAU feeder system has had a huge impact on the womens college and professional games. Even the most knowledgable college fans on this site are not that aware of what has happened to the feeder systems both in respect to players and coaches. The level of talant and already developed players has expanded to the point where their availability is not exclusive to just a few high profile programs. The same is true of coaches. There are some very good male coaches that decide to coach in the womand game, which is something that didn't happen just a decade and a half ago. Geno was an exception and we see the impact it had. The coaches at that time were purely the product of the womans game they experienced as players which was not reflective of the rapidly changing dynamic of womans basketball.

The ignorance displayed in Mo'ni Davis basketball level displayed by many on this site and in the basketball world, including her own coaches and advisors speak to that. With the basketball track she was on, she had a snow balls chance in hell of even getting a D1 scholarship let along being recruited by a top program. There were just too many players who spent the year round developing skills already way ahead of her. Being a good athlete is just not enough anymore. Her own parants and coaches were totally clueless in that respect.

I believe that the time Becky Hammond spent under Gregg Popovich will reap enormous rewards in years to come in respect to establishing a major Womans Basketball Tree and its resujlting branches. One can already see that Hammond is in league of her own in the WNBA in respect to coaching. She will impact Chelsea Gray, who has the potential to take womanss basketball coaching to another level as well. People on this site will not like this, but time has already passed Geno by. He was the best for his time, but the game has moved on.

Firmly disagree. When did Geno EVER consider Mone Davis a serious UCONN prospect? He never did! The game has not passed Geno by. Give Geno equivalent talent and he will beat you. Give him less talent and he will get that talent much further than any coach in the game. Any craftsman is only as good as his tools. If you are slightly right about one thing is that the recent tools in the UCONN bag have not been as sharp as some UCONN fans want to admit. The acquisition of talent is also a responsibility of the coach- But Geno has already cop to this deficit by stating I’m paraphrasing- “Some of the players we are getting are not the players we thought we were getting.”

 

[JellyBean]

Loving this recruiting addition to the Duke WBB program. Throw in the fact that Coach Lawson beat out Notre Dame and Coach Ivey for Donovan. This was huge pick up for the program and a nice start to the 2023 recruiting cycle. If Duke can land Madison Booker or Chole Kitts, those pieces could be a program changer, provided they get some solid skill development going. Duke might be a problem. I love Coach Lawson and what she is building in Durham.

 

[triaddukefan]

A lot of proclaimed love for Lawson in here. Only fitting that some of yall would volunteer to send Coach a couple of New Haven Pizzas. Being the fan I am, just send them to me and I will deliver them to her. I think she likes pizzas with meatballs, sausage, peppers, and mushrooms.

 

[Alibi Ike]

D


Some might downplay this, but she was also the coach of the US Olympics team that won the 3x3 gold medal. Per this article, she worked five years with the US 3x3 program, and this was active coaching and well appreciated by the players.

Kara Lawson Named 2021 USA Basketball 3x3 Coach of the Year

U.S. Olympic 3x3 Team Named 2021 USA Basketball 3x3 Team of the Year.

www.usab.com

Please people, don't bring up 3x3 "coaching".

 

[HuskyNan]

A lot of proclaimed love for Lawson in here. Only fitting that some of yall would volunteer to send Coach a couple of New Haven Pizzas. Being the fan I am, just send them to me and I will deliver them to her. I think she likes pizzas with meatballs, sausage, peppers, and mushrooms.

Sounds like the Modern Apizza Italian Bomb

The Definitive Guide to New Haven Pizza

There are regional pizza styles across the US, but none is perhaps more storied than New Haven-style pizza

www.eater.com

 

[JoePgh]

... I believe that the time Becky Hammond spent under Gregg Popovich will reap enormous rewards in years to come in respect to establishing a major Womans Basketball Tree and its resujlting branches. One can already see that Hammond is in league of her own in the WNBA in respect to coaching. She will impact Chelsea Gray, who has the potential to take womanss basketball coaching to another level as well. People on this site will not like this, but time has already passed Geno by. He was the best for his time, but the game has moved on.

Most of your post was inoffensive and even uncontroversial, right up until that zinger in the last sentence. I can't speak for the others, but what I don't like is throwing a bald assertion such as that into the end of your post (knowing "people on this site will not like this"), and not presenting evidence or reasoning in support of it. If that is your view, then on what evidence do you base that view? Since you didn't say, even in an otherwise verbose post, we can only guess what you are thinking.

You are impressed with Becky Hammon, and perhaps you may feel that the NBA-style offense that she has brought to Las Vegas is where the game has moved on to? Yes, the Aces take a lot of 3-point shots, which is logical for a team that has Kelsey Plum, Jackie Young, and Chelsea Gray in their starting lineup. NBA teams these days also do that -- I read somewhere that 45% of shot attempts in the NBA are 3-pointers. Even so, I think Geno (not to mention a number of less gifted coaches in the college and pro ranks) would be capable of figuring out that when you have that kind of talent on your team, that is probably where your offensive advantage lies.

I think that there are other coaches in the WNBA who are, for practical purposes, as good as Becky Hammon. I am thinking specifically of the Chicago Sky coach (sorry I'm not recalling his name now), and the Connecticut Sun coach, Curt Miller. Neither of their teams relies on 3's to the same extent as Las Vegas, but that's because their strengths lie elsewhere. The Sun in particular are a front-court dominated team (as the Aces used to be when they had Cambage), so they don't take or make nearly as many 3's as Las Vegas. But I don't think that any of these three top WNBA coaches would or should use the same strategies if they were coaching top-level college teams, because even the best college teams don't have the same concentration of talent as the best WNBA teams.

I'm not saying that Geno's basketball knowledge is immune from obsolescence. It would not surprise me, for example, if Sue Bird (or Miller or Hammon) knows some X-and-O stuff that Geno is not aware of. But there are very few people (and no current college coaches including Kara Lawson or Lindsey Whalen) who would fit into that category. Certainly Dawn Staley, despite her recent success against Geno, is not a match for him at the X-and-O level, any more that Muffet McGraw was in 2013 after she won 7 of 9 games against Geno. Dawn and Muffet won with better talent, not with better strategy or game planning.

But here I am refuting arguments that you didn't make, because you didn't make any arguments. You just dropped that compost at the end of your loquacious post, knowing it would irritate people, and not developing your reasoning at all. Or did you have any reasoning?

 

[Reypl21]

Most of your post was inoffensive and even uncontroversial, right up until that zinger in the last sentence. I can't speak for the others, but what I don't like is throwing a bald assertion such as that into the end of your post (knowing "people on this site will not like this"), and not presenting evidence or reasoning in support of it. If that is your view, then on what evidence do you base that view? Since you didn't say, even in an otherwise verbose post, we can only guess what you are thinking.

You are impressed with Becky Hammon, and perhaps you may feel that the NBA-style offense that she has brought to Las Vegas is where the game has moved on to? Yes, the Aces take a lot of 3-point shots, which is logical for a team that has Kelsey Plum, Jackie Young, and Chelsea Gray in their starting lineup. NBA teams these days also do that -- I read somewhere that 45% of shot attempts in the NBA are 3-pointers. Even so, I think Geno (not to mention a number of less gifted coaches in the college and pro ranks) would be capable of figuring out that when you have that kind of talent on your team, that is probably where your offensive advantage lies.

I think that there are other coaches in the WNBA who are, for practical purposes, as good as Becky Hammon. I am thinking specifically of the Chicago Sky coach (sorry I'm not recalling his name now), and the Connecticut Sun coach, Curt Miller. Neither of their teams relies on 3's to the same extent as Las Vegas, but that's because their strengths lie elsewhere. The Sun in particular are a front-court dominated team (as the Aces used to be when they had Cambage), so they don't take or make nearly as many 3's as Las Vegas. But I don't think that any of these three top WNBA coaches would or should use the same strategies if they were coaching top-level college teams, because even the best college teams don't have the same concentration of talent as the best WNBA teams.

I'm not saying that Geno's basketball knowledge is immune from obsolescence. It would not surprise me, for example, if Sue Bird (or Miller or Hammon) knows some X-and-O stuff that Geno is not aware of. But there are very few people (and no current college coaches including Kara Lawson or Lindsey Whalen) who would fit into that category. Certainly Dawn Staley, despite her recent success against Geno, is not a match for him at the X-and-O level, any more that Muffet McGraw was in 2013 after she won 7 of 9 games against Geno. Dawn and Muffet won with better talent, not with better strategy or game planning.

But here I am refuting arguments that you didn't make, because you didn't make any arguments. You just dropped that compost at the end of your loquacious post, knowing it would irritate people, and not developing your reasoning at all. Or did you have any reasoning?

Muffett won 7 of 9 games against Geno because she had better talent? And not because of better strategy or game planning? Yeah, I'm not buying that. I think you have it backwards

 

[Jc718]

I was watching a Geno Auriemma show thing recently from around 2010 and he was saying how people told him when it was like 2006 that he should retire because they said his best days were behind him and his teams would never be what they used to be. Absurd! Imagine if he had listened to them how many great teams we would’ve missed out on in the decade that followed

 

[willtalk]

Firmly disagree. When did Geno EVER consider Mone Davis a serious UCONN prospect? He never did! The game has not passed Geno by. Give Geno equivalent talent and he will beat you. Give him less talent and he will get that talent much further than any coach in the game. Any craftsman is only as good as his tools. If you are slightly right about one thing is that the recent tools in the UCONN bag have not been as sharp as some UCONN fans want to admit. The acquisition of talent is also a responsibility of the coach- But Geno has already cop to this deficit by stating I’m paraphrasing- “Some of the players we are getting are not the players we thought we were getting.”

Read my post again. I never said Geno considered Mo'ni a serious UConn prostpect. I doubt many if any other D1 coaches ever did. I was referring to her own AAU coach and her parents who were clueless of the changes had already taken place in girls High School basketball. As to my closeing remarks on Geno i will explain why I added him to that post in my following response to Joe Pugu.

 

[willtalk]

.Most of your post was inoffensive and even uncontroversial, right up until that zinger in the last sentence. I can't speak for the others, but what I don't like is throwing a bald assertion such as that into the end of your post (knowing "people on this site will not like this"), and not presenting evidence or reasoning in support of it. If that is your view, then on what evidence do you base that view? Since you didn't say, even in an otherwise verbose post, we can only guess what you are thinking ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

But here I am refuting arguments that you didn't make, because you didn't make any arguments. You just dropped that compost at the end of your loquacious post, knowing it would irritate people, and not developing your reasoning at all. Or did you have any reasoning?

Perhaps I should have clearified my comment of Geno, but my post was already pretty long. My post on Geno was to be taken in context of the rest of my post. It was just another example. I never meant to imply that Geno was still not a top flight coach or that he might not even still be the best. Rather I used him as an example for WCBB catching up with him in general. It was also in context with the thread some seasons ago about if Geno's system is as effective as it once was in respect to the different types of players coming out of High School today.

His system was geared to the elite players who used to flock to UConn because of the type of program he ran. Gemo's mentor in that system, John Wooden, ( yes Geno said so him self that he geared his system based on Johns phiosophy as written in his book ). Wooden , himself, declared a few years after he retired that he did not feel he could coach the players coming out of high school bck even then. Of course he was speaking of the mens game and the womens games players were still old school until recently.

Unlike Pat and other coaches of the past era's Geno has adjusted ( probably more than he really wished too ) and is still coaching at a very high level. However, due to the change in WCBB he will never ever be head and shoulders above the rest again. It's entirely geared to the attitude of the players he has to work with today. I should have emphasize that the game has not passed him, but rather his system by. I did go into detail on this matter in one of the past threads about how long Geno was going to continue to want to coach if he had to compromise.

My comment about fans on this site not liking my comment was in respect to their belief that Geno is still far superior to every other coach in WCBB. That is not necessarily true anymore operating under this new dyanamic.

 

[HuskyNan]

People on this site will not like this, but time has already passed Geno by. He was the best for his time, but the game has moved on.

Yet he was one of two coaches in the last National Championship game, having got there with, essentially, two thirds of a team.

Unbelievable.

 

[triaddukefan]

Sounds like the Modern Apizza Italian Bomb

The Definitive Guide to New Haven Pizza

There are regional pizza styles across the US, but none is perhaps more storied than New Haven-style pizza

www.eater.com

I looked at one of those pizzas on youtube, the first thing that came to mind was

 

[JoePgh]

... However, due to the change in WCBB he will never ever be head and shoulders above the rest again. It's entirely geared to the attitude of the players he has to work with today. I should have emphasize that the game has not passed him, but rather his system by. ...

My comment about fans on this site not liking my comment was in respect to their belief that Geno is still far superior to every other coach in WCBB. That is not necessarily true anymore operating under this new dyanamic.

So I think (??) you are saying that the game has passed Geno's system by, not because it no longer works or can be beaten with newer systems when it is played correctly, but because the "attitude" of today's players makes it difficult or impossible for him to coach them to play it correctly. Have I got that right?

Looking at UConn's current roster, I certainly don't see any "attitude" problems that make them unwilling to accept his coaching or play his system. And there are still players like Paige, Nika, Azzi, Ice Brady, and Caroline who seem to be drawn to UConn precisely because of the system that they play -- Paige said "it looked like so much fun" when she watched it on TV as a high school player. The newest recruit, Ines Bettencourt, seems to fit that mold as well.

So maybe you are saying that UConn is not at the top level because it is not attracting the players who might get it there, presumably like those on the South Carolina roster. (Who else has recently had consistent success against UConn?) I will allow your point that perhaps Geno would have trouble coaching the Gamecock roster, because he might have trouble relating to those players, and therefore might have trouble teaching them his system.

But can you imagine Dawn coaching UConn's roster? If Dawn had coached UConn's roster last year, do you think she would have taken the team to the National Final game? I certainly don't. And equally, if Geno were the SC coach last year, coaching the South Carolina roster, I'm not sure he would have gotten them to an NC trophy. But I think Geno would have a better record than Dawn in successfully coaching the other team's roster.

All this proves is that coaches recruit players with whom they develop a rapport, and that rapport is often based on shared life experience. I don't think it is surprising that Geno, as a child immigrant himself to the US from Europe, finds an affinity with players who grew up in Europe. Nor is it coincidental that Dawn finds rapport with players who grew up with similar backgrounds to her own. But I doubt very much that it is a foregone conclusion that Dawn's kind of players are always going to beat Geno's kind of players, and that therefore his system (and the players who are attracted to it) have been "passed by".

 

[UConnCat]

Yet he was one of two coaches in the last National Championship game, having got there with, essentially, two thirds of a team.

Unbelievable.

Watch what is said when his streak of 14 consecutive Final Fours ends. Could be sooner than we'd like.

Multiple paragraphs saying . . . something.

 

[SCGamecock]

Most of your post was inoffensive and even uncontroversial, right up until that zinger in the last sentence. I can't speak for the others, but what I don't like is throwing a bald assertion such as that into the end of your post (knowing "people on this site will not like this"), and not presenting evidence or reasoning in support of it. If that is your view, then on what evidence do you base that view? Since you didn't say, even in an otherwise verbose post, we can only guess what you are thinking.

You are impressed with Becky Hammon, and perhaps you may feel that the NBA-style offense that she has brought to Las Vegas is where the game has moved on to? Yes, the Aces take a lot of 3-point shots, which is logical for a team that has Kelsey Plum, Jackie Young, and Chelsea Gray in their starting lineup. NBA teams these days also do that -- I read somewhere that 45% of shot attempts in the NBA are 3-pointers. Even so, I think Geno (not to mention a number of less gifted coaches in the college and pro ranks) would be capable of figuring out that when you have that kind of talent on your team, that is probably where your offensive advantage lies.

I think that there are other coaches in the WNBA who are, for practical purposes, as good as Becky Hammon. I am thinking specifically of the Chicago Sky coach (sorry I'm not recalling his name now), and the Connecticut Sun coach, Curt Miller. Neither of their teams relies on 3's to the same extent as Las Vegas, but that's because their strengths lie elsewhere. The Sun in particular are a front-court dominated team (as the Aces used to be when they had Cambage), so they don't take or make nearly as many 3's as Las Vegas. But I don't think that any of these three top WNBA coaches would or should use the same strategies if they were coaching top-level college teams, because even the best college teams don't have the same concentration of talent as the best WNBA teams.

I'm not saying that Geno's basketball knowledge is immune from obsolescence. It would not surprise me, for example, if Sue Bird (or Miller or Hammon) knows some X-and-O stuff that Geno is not aware of. But there are very few people (and no current college coaches including Kara Lawson or Lindsey Whalen) who would fit into that category. Certainly Dawn Staley, despite her recent success against Geno, is not a match for him at the X-and-O level, any more that Muffet McGraw was in 2013 after she won 7 of 9 games against Geno. Dawn and Muffet won with better talent, not with better strategy or game planning.

But here I am refuting arguments that you didn't make, because you didn't make any arguments. You just dropped that compost at the end of your loquacious post, knowing it would irritate people, and not developing your reasoning at all. Or did you have any reasoning?

South Carolina had better talent than UConn last year? CT literally had (3) #1 and (2) #2 players on its roster last year. LOL

That’s the first time I’ve EVER read that on the Boneyard.

 

[Longtime fan]

I sure wouldn’t bet against Kara Lawson! There are few people in basketball that I respect more than her. I believe she will be just as successful as a coach as she has been in other endeavors.

Have to agree here. And I think it will be great to get Duke back as a major contender in WBB.

 

[CocoHusky]

South Carolina had better talent than UConn last year? CT literally had (3) #1 and (2) #2 players on its roster last year. LOL

That’s the first time I’ve EVER read that on the Boneyard.

It Should not have been your first time reading it,: From an April 2022 Post.

The explanation is profoundly simple: For each positional matchup the South Carolina player was either taller and or quicker than the UCONN player and UCONN merely boxing out was not sufficient.

Details:
Aaliyah Boston was much quicker than a compromised ONO
Henderson was quicker than a not completely healed Paige
Cooke is/was quicker than Azzi Fudd
Brea Beal is/was quicker than Christyn Williams
Victoria Saxton is/was quicker than AE.

When South Carolina went to the bench:
Cardoso was matched up with Evina Westbrook and giving away 7 inches of height in the process resulting in Evina being nicked up in this game.
LeLe Grissette and Leticia Amihere are both taller and quicker than Caroline Ducharme.
Saniya Rivers and Bree Hall are both taller and quicker than Nika.

To South Carolina's credit and UCONN's detriment SC was not satisfied with winning the individual defensive matchups. SC doubled down and compounded their advantage with decisive switching on the perimeter. Think about this for a second: South Carolina block 4 shots during this game. 3 of the 4 blocked shots were off perimeter switches and came from three different players ( Boston, Beal, Saxton). This was really a defensive masterclass and this is what UCONN used to do to other teams.

 

[SCGamecock]

It Should not have been your first time reading it,: From an April 2022 Post.

I’m reading an explanation of why SC won. Nowhere did I explicitly read that SC had better talent than UConn. In actuality, you’re saying everything else BUT that. Which is fine, because I agree.

Not referring to your post specifically, because you actually did give Dawn coaching credit. But several posts throughout this thread are insinuating that SC only beat UConn because of better talent, as if there’s no possible way Dawn could’ve outcoached Geno. We actually saw that happen twice last season. This whole idea of SC being so much more talented than UConn is a farce. It’s not true, both teams were pretty evenly matched. Dawn doesn’t get credit for her X’s and O’s coaching ability. You can appreciate Geno for his mastery in that area all the while realizing that occasionally he gets outcoached in that area. Nobody is perfect. That’s the root of what I’m getting at.

 

[CocoHusky]

I’m reading an explanation of why SC won. Nowhere did I explicitly read that SC had better talent than UConn. In actuality, you’re saying everything else BUT that. Which is fine, because I agree.

Not referring to your post specifically, because you actually did give Dawn coaching credit. But several posts throughout this thread are insinuating that SC only beat UConn because of better talent, as if there’s no possible way Dawn could’ve outcoached Geno. We actually saw that happen twice last season. This whole idea of SC being so much more talented than UConn is a farce. It’s not true, both teams were pretty evenly matched. Dawn doesn’t get credit for her X’s and O’s coaching ability. You can appreciate Geno for his mastery in that area all the while realizing that occasionally he gets outcoached in that area. Nobody is perfect. That’s the root of what I’m getting at.

I explicitly did not talk about "talent" in the post because I wanted to focus on what happened that night. Too many of these "talent" discussions start off by talking about what the player was ranked in HS- Your prior post is certainly guilty of that. The reality is that some HS players don't live up to their ranking and any player at this level can have a good or bad night.
As far as Dawn outcoaching Geno-absolutely but only temporarily. When you play a team often enough, you are not a terrific coach if you are not closing the gap and eventually winning some games. Dawn is absolutely a terrific coach. Other terrific coaches have closed the gap on Geno before, Harry Paretta, Muffet McGraw, and Tara VanDerveer just to name a few. BTW part of Dawn not getting enough credit may be justified. South Carolina's first Championship came when Melanie Balcolm was hired to architect the offense and much of the recent recruiting success (including Boston) has been attributed to Jolette coming on board.

 

[SCGamecock]

I explicitly did not talk about "talent" in the post because I wanted to focus on what happened that night. Too many of these "talent" discussions start off by talking about what the player was ranked in HS- Your prior post is certainly guilty of that. The reality is that some HS players don't live up to their ranking and any player at this level can have a good or bad night.

As far as Dawn outcoaching Geno-absolutely but only temporarily. When you play a team often enough, you are not a terrific coach if you are not closing the gap and eventually winning some games. Dawn is absolutely a terrific coach. Other terrific coaches have closed the gap on Geno before, Harry Paretta, Muffet McGraw, and Tara VanDerveer just to name a few. BTW part of Dawn not getting enough credit may be justified. South Carolina's first Championship came when Melanie Balcolm was hired to architect the offense and much of the recent recruiting success (including Boston) has been attributed to Jolette coming on board.

..and this is fine and dandy, but my specific post was in reference to a poster commenting about SC having better talent than UConn. That’s simply not true. Perhaps one team rose to the occasion (twice) and the other didn’t, but if only one team’s talent came to play and the other’s didn’t.. then that would seem to be the fault of those players and those coaches. Geno gets credit when he gets elite players and they play at and beyond their level, so he also gets credit when those same players don’t play to their level. But if those same players don’t play to their level that still doesn’t negate the fact that UConn has/had talent on par with South Carolina. And some here would argue beyond.

 

[JellyBean]

Meanwhile, back to Donovan and Duke. After this season, hopefully Coach Lawson and her staff got some decent recruits in mind for 23-24 season. They will have ten players but hopefully those are some skilled players.

 

[SCGamecock]

Meanwhile, back to Donovan and Duke. After this season, hopefully Coach Lawson and her staff got some decent recruits in mind for 23-24 season. They will have ten players but hopefully those are some skilled players.

Apologies for hijacking the thread. Love this commitment for Duke.